IR 05000321/1978031
| ML20150C292 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 10/19/1978 |
| From: | Bradford W, Kellogg P, Taylor P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20150C281 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-321-78-31, 50-366-78-39, NUDOCS 7811220064 | |
| Download: ML20150C292 (2) | |
Text
e UNITED St ATEs O.
[sk* 8800g[o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'
,.
i g
REGloN ll 101 M ARIETT A STREET,N.W.
f
,
e
&
., y,
AT L ANT A, G E oRGI A 30303
g
[
- o
%, *'... * /
50-321/78-31 and 50-366/78-39 Report Nos.:
Docket Nos.:
50-321 and 50-366 License Nos.: DPR-57 and NPF-5 Licensee:
Georgia Power Company 270 Peachtree Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia Edwin I, Hatch I and 2 Facility Name:
E. I. Hatch Plant, Baxley, Georgia Inspection at:
Inspection conducted:
September 5-8, 1978 W. H. Bradford Inspector:
P. A.
~a, lor Accompanying Persongel:
g/ f
[a
$
/
ff [/ ~gg, @
Approved by:
.,
ate P. @&eaf(Support Se:bc:- No
.
Nuc Reactor Operations and he lear Support Branch Inspection Summary 50-321/78-31 and 50-366/78-39 5-8, 1978 (Report Nos.
Inspection on SeptemberRoutine, unannounced inspection of licensed operator requalification training program, formal training and Areas Inspected:
plant personnel and to observe plant operations.
24 inspector-hours by one NRC inspector.In tne three areas inspected n Results:
tions were identified.
_
?s1122og
-
.
-
-
_
~
.
t
,
RIl Report Nos. 50-321/78-31 I-1 and 50-366/78-39 NNdu ch IM d DETAILS I Prepared by:
Da e W. H. Bradford, Reactor Inspector Nuclear Support Section No. 2 Reactor Operations and Nuclear
-
Support Branch Dates of Inspection:
tember 5-8, 1978
[d r Reviewed by:
e__
11e f path PLL/yQ,t Section No.
Nuc16ar Suppor Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch
!
Persons Contacted 1.
Georgia Power Company (GPC)
l
- M. Manry, Plant Manager
- 11. C. Nix, Assistant Plant Manager
- Tom Green, Superintendent of Plant Services Engineering
,
l
- Stan Baxley, Operations Supervisor
- Carl E. Belflower, QA Site Supervisor
- G. Earl Spell, Senior QA Field Representative Dan Moore, Training Coordinator Fred McCarley, Instrumentation and Control Supervisor George Ellis, Acting Superintendent of Maintenance Chester Patterson, Maintenance Supervisor Tom Collins, H. P. Supervisor Deryle Bennett, Chemistry Supervisor
- Denotes those present at exit interview.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings 2.
(Closed) (IE Report 50-321/77-20) Retraining and Replacement Training for Non-licensed Personnel The inspector verified that the implementation of corrective action stated in Georgia Power Corpany's letter of December 1, 1977, had been accomplished by review of documentation and training records.
The inspector had no further questions.
.
.
.
-
. - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
$
d
,
RII Report Nos. 50-321/78-31 and 50-366/78-39 I-2 3.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more informatien is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations.
One unresolved item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in paragraph 6 of this report.
4.
Exit Inte rview A management interview was conducted at the conclusion of the inspec-tion on September 8, 1978, with Mr. M. Manry and other licensee staff members (denoted in paragraph 1).
All subjects presented in these details were discussed.
The licensee acknowledged the inspection findings.
5.
Retraining and Replacement Training for Non-Licensed Personnel The inspector reviewed training related documentation and procedures l
and interviewed nine non-licensed personnel to verify that the training
'
described in Administrative Procedures No. 19, " Orientation of New Personnel", No. 200, " Plant Personnel Training and Retraining", No.
203, " General Employee Training", No. 204, " Maintenance Personnel Qualification Training", and Periodic Training for Non-Licensed Power Generation Personnel as implemented by Georgia Power Company Inter-office communication letter of May 10, 1978, was being provided and met the requirements of Section 6.4 of the technical specifications, ANSI N18.1-1971, and Section 13.2 of the FSAR.
Interviews with female employees confirmed that information had been provided to them with regard to prenatal radiation exposure. Within the areas inspected no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Licensed Operator Requalification Training Program The inspector reviewed documents and training records to verify that a requalification training program for NRC licensed reactor operators (Ros) and senior reactor operators (SR0s) had been established and was consistent with the requirements of the licensee's approved operator requalification training program, Section 6.4 of the technical specifi-cations, and Appendix A to 10 CFR 55. The inspector reviewed individual training records for eight licensed operators.
The inspector questioned the licensee on the licensee's interpretation of Section 4C of Appendix A to 10 CFR 55 concerning systematic obser-vations and evaluation by supervisors of the performance and competency of senior reactor operators who are staff members.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
..
.
.
..
.
_ _ _ _ _ _
-
...
<
I Rll Report Nos. 50-321/78-31 and 50-366/78-39 I-3 The licensee stated that their interpretation of Section 4C permitted supervisors to perform evaluations of operators and senior operators.
i The supervisors all hold senior operators licenses, which include I
l those supervisory positions found in Figure 6.2.2.1 of the technical specifications.
Since they, the evaluators, are senior operators and are required to be familiar with the console as are those vno they are evaluating, that further evaluation is not necessary.
The inspector informed the licensee's training coordinator that this item would be reviewed in the Regional Office with the Region 11 representative of the Operating License Branch.
During a telephone call on September 12, 1978, the licensee was informed that the NRC position on the matter was that all licensed personnel, regardless of position, must be evaluated as required by Section 4C of Appendix A to 10 CFR 55.
The licensee stated that a console panel existed and represents an
,
accurate reproduction of the console and could be used for evaluations.
The inspector stated that if those supervisors, who evaluated operating staff members, could utilize this control panel during their evaluation that this would be an adequat.e means of evaluation. Furthermore, the NRC would permit up to two members of the staff to be exempt since they would be performing the evaluations.
The licensee agreed to amend Administrative Procedure No. 200, " Plant Personnel Training and Retraining", and implement the requirement for evaluation of supervisory staf f personnel who hold senior operating licenses. This is unresolved item No. 78-31-01. This item will remain unresolved pending a review and implementation of the Amended Administrative Procedure No. 200.
_____ _ _._. -______ - __
-